I think I just inadvertently replied to this on another thread, but yes -- this is something we need to get on our roadmap very soon.
On Dec 21 2009, 6:10 pm, Thomas Broyer <t.bro...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Googlers, > > How about deprecating c.g.g.user.client.Element and > c.g.g.user.client.DOM altogether and "port" all existing widgets to > c.g.g.dom.client.*? > A first "pass", say in 2.1, wouldn't break public APIs, still using > c.g.g.user.client.Element as public and protected methods' return type > and fields; only the second pass (in 2.2 or even 2.3) would completely > get rid of c.g.g.user.client.Element. > > As for c.g.g.user.client.DOM, there are a few methods that have no > equivalent in c.g.g.dom.client.* (getChild/insertChild/etc. for > instance, which deal with child elements, not child nodes). Those > would have to either be moved to c.g.g.dom.client.Element or removed > altogether in the end (which means "deprecated with replacement API" > vs. "just deprecated" in the mean time). > Most widgets have complete control over their DOM, so changing from > "child element" to "child node" shouldn't break them. > > I volunteer to providing patches (probably one widget at a time), but > I'd like to know upfront if I'd waste my time or if it'd have a chance > of being accepted. -- http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
